477 réponses à ce sujet

[Icinix]

xXljoshlXx wrote...

Icinix wrote...

What I would wish though is a few more of the larger companies would every now and then be prepared to aim at a game at a niche market. I've got nothing against blockbuster titles, but why can't we have both? Why does it need to be mutually exclusive?

Thank you! Finally... somebody who gets it!

Why would a large company aim at a niche market?

Diversity in their portfolio. Additional revenue stream should their mainstream release fail.  The ability to experiment and trial new and interesting approaches to games without fear of risking the whole apple cart.  Finally, because the company loves the game industry, because they love their fans. Because they love what gaming can and should be.  Because they believe in growth, and thinking outside the box, because gaming should be an art, and not a mass produced machine steam rolling the entertainment industry.

Personally, and at the risk of getting into a longer than intended debate, more and more mainstream blockbuster releases are becoming very generic and identical.  The elements, graphics, features could just about be applied to each and everyone of them.  Sure, it might sell well and make someone lots of money. But is it really good for gaming? Is it really good for the future of gaming?  I don't think its a co-incidence the indie scene has seen unprecedented growth over the last few years.

This isn't aboout FPS, RPG, RTS, TPS or whatever combination you can come up with.  But the whole direction of the industry leaning towards this gaming world where you line the top ten big name releases side by side in a mugshot, and the average gamer can't tell them apart.  Don't get me wrong, I love a lot of these games and I display them proudly in my old fashioned old man bookshelp in their old fashioned ancient style collectors edition boxes, but they'll be long forgotten trophies in a few years.  That memory will be stored in the same brain space as the memory of the fast food I indugled in last week.

[Terror_K]

Savber100 wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

Funny... I felt pretty damn fulfilled by Baldur's Gate, Baldur's Gate 2, NWN, KotOR, Jade Empire, ME1 and Dragon Age: Origins.

I also felt fulfilled by several shooters, such as Unreal Tournament, Half-Life 2, Team Fortress 2, Gears of War, the early CoD titles, etc. I love all sorts of AAA titles and genres, including the Elder Scrolls and Fallout series, the Hitman and Thief games, Portal 1 & 2, the GTA titles, Red Dead Redemption, The Sims, etc.

God damn it, Terror... You just had to name all of my favorite games in one go.

Now I have to erase my previous preconception of you as an old coot that hates anything new or mainstream. 

Sorry. I also didn't realise being 28 was considered as being old.

But honestly are you displeased with the recent screenshots that showed more emphasis on character progression and branching powers? What about the weapon mods?

I'm happy with this, but I don't feel its enough if that's all. And it seems almost all the RPG that's being brought back is simply there to facilitate the combat and shooting stuff. Sure, there's weapon-modding again, which is great, but is ME3 still just all about combat? What about other customisation and non-combat skills? How is Paragon/Renegade being handled? Does armour actually work like armour, and are omni-tools and biotic amps back? Is XP meaingful or still just a seemingly abitrary number thrown at you on a "Mission Complete" screen? Does the game embrace its RPG side, or try to hide it? Does the shooter combat actually suit the style of the game, or is it just pure TPS combat wedged into an RPG, ala ME2? Is the focus on more intense combat and melee just "dudebro" pandering? All these questions and more have still to be answered.

I can't speak for the story and C&C but shouldn't you hold back those criticisms  under ME3 is released? I feel it's a little too soon to start cry wolf until Bioware shows itself as incompetent in the choices and consequences you made in Mass Effect. 

To be honest, despite their claims, ME2 has made me highly sceptical of this aspect, as has DA2. I'm expecting lots of emails, weak substitutions and variations that are little more than a different flavour of the same drink  (so to speak). We'll see though... it is the final piece, and they do have more time developing it and more people than ME2 did. Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised and my choices will truly alter the universe, but they barely did in ME2, so why would they suddenly now? Their constantly saying, "this is the best place to start" and "this is a new beginning for Mass Effect" etc. don't exactly help matters.

[Clonedzero]

well can you name another series other than mass effect that has tried carrying over choices as minor as a single conversation with a side character, from one game to the next? if you can name a game that does that level of detailed save imports than ill be surprised.

[javierabegazo]

Terror, generally you're posts are pretty sensible but just where in the who did you pull 77% from....??

[Apple_NdiB]

Where's the option to say "I like how developers are moving RPGs forward by scrapping antiquated gameplay mechanics in favour of using the technology available to make the player feel more engrossed in the universe and create an experience closer to the ones the first RPGs would have had if they weren't held back by what was available at the time. And Breath."

[Lumikki]

javierabegazo wrote...

Terror, generally you're posts are pretty sensible but just where in the who did you pull 77% from....??

He counted two top choises togather and think it's presenting direction of RPGs.

Example: "I want details, depth and customization in my RPGs. (50%, 1,894 Votes)"

I don't know what the hell this has to do with direction change, what's happening?

Modifié par Lumikki, 08 août 2011 - 11:07 .

[Clonedzero]

Lumikki wrote...

javierabegazo wrote...

Terror, generally you're posts are pretty sensible but just where in the who did you pull 77% from....??

He counted two top choises togather and think it's presenting direction of RPGs.

Example:

I want details, depth and customization in my RPGs. (50%, 1,894 Votes)

I don't know what the hell this has to do with direction change, what's happening?

well the 50% choice doesnt really mean they're unhappy with it.

plus its a pretty bad statistic based on a fiarly small sample size reading a fairly biased article, so the people who are unhappy with it are more likely to read the article and vote than people that are happy with it and see the article as pointless whining.

[Terror_K]

javierabegazo wrote...

Terror, generally you're posts are pretty sensible but just where in the who did you pull 77% from....??

I want details, depth and customization in my RPGs (50%) + The genre is becoming so "dumbed down" it's going to be ruined! (27%)

50 + 27 = 77.

Based on the fact that the other answers are "I love that they're more accessible and easier to play! (12%), I'm not really sure. (5%), I prefer action over RPG elements (4%) and What's an RPG? (2%), I attrubute these aspects to be closer to the type of thing BioWare is going for these days: accessibility/ease of play and action. That seems to be their focus with ME2+3 and DA2 lately, rather than "details, depth and customisation" (although admittedly ME3 is bringing back a bit of this).

Simply put: I don't think the two more popular options vote-wise sum up Mass Effect 2, Dragon Age 2 or BioWare as a whole lately (even if ME3 is backtracking somewhat, and the DA2 team have since copped to their games' faults).

[javierabegazo]

Lumikki wrote...

javierabegazo wrote...

Terror, generally you're posts are pretty sensible but just where in the who did you pull 77% from....??

He counted two top choises togather and think it's presenting direction of RPGs.

Example: "I want details, depth and customization in my RPGs. (50%, 1,894 Votes)"

I don't know what the hell this has to do with direction change, what's happening?

My point exactly. It's a poorly made poll, and immediately flawed to begin with. First of all, if someone doesn't know about RPG's how likely are they to read that article and respond to it? Second, I've never heard of anyone who didn't want a general "details depth and customization" in their RPGs.

[Clonedzero]

also respond to my post on page 3 plz

[javierabegazo]

Terror_K wrote...

javierabegazo wrote...

Terror, generally you're posts are pretty sensible but just where in the who did you pull 77% from....??

I want details, depth and customization in my RPGs (50%) + The genre is becoming so "dumbed down" it's going to be ruined! (27%)

50 + 27 = 77.

Based on the fact that the other answers are "I love that they're more accessible and easier to play! (12%), I'm not really sure. (5%), I prefer action over RPG elements (4%) and What's an RPG? (2%), I attrubute these aspects to be closer to the type of thing BioWare is going for these days: accessibility/ease of play and action. That seems to be their focus with ME2+3 and DA2 lately, rather than "details, depth and customisation" (although admittedly ME3 is bringing back a bit of this).

Simply put: I don't think the two more popular options vote-wise sum up Mass Effect 2, Dragon Age 2 or BioWare as a whole lately (even if ME3 is backtracking somewhat, and the DA2 team have since copped to their games' faults).

Do you seriously not realize just HOW MUCH of your 77% is based on your interpretation? Nevermind, forget I said anything, I don't see this going anywhere.

[Candidate 88766]

Terror_K wrote...

But honestly are you displeased with the recent screenshots that showed more emphasis on character progression and branching powers? What about the weapon mods?

I'm happy with this, but I don't feel its enough if that's all. And it seems almost all the RPG that's being brought back is simply there to facilitate the combat and shooting stuff. Sure, there's weapon-modding again, which is great, but is ME3 still just all about combat? What about other customisation and non-combat skills? How is Paragon/Renegade being handled? Does armour actually work like armour, and are omni-tools and biotic amps back? Is XP meaingful or still just a seemingly abitrary number thrown at you on a "Mission Complete" screen? Does the game embrace its RPG side, or try to hide it? Does the shooter combat actually suit the style of the game, or is it just pure TPS combat wedged into an RPG, ala ME2? Is the focus on more intense combat and melee just "dudebro" pandering? All these questions and more have still to be answered.

But surely armour customization and omni-tool and biotic amp upgrades are combat skills? Pretty much every skill in ME1 was aimed at combat. Even the skills for unlocking storage units were there just so you could unlock better guns for use in the combat. Come to think of it, most skills in pretty much all RPGs are combat skills. Normally you'll have some kind of social/conversation skill and possibly a couple of stealth ones to allow you to bypass combat, but generally all the skills and customization are there so you can customise how your character performs in combat. Not just in ME, but pretty much any RPG.

I agree that XP could be implemented again in the ME1 style where it is based on what you've killed. I also think paragon and renegade could be better implemented than in ME2.

However, I think the shooter combat in ME2 fits the style of game Bioware is going for far more than ME1's combat shooter style. Stats based aiming works well in many RPGs, but in a game that requires a lot of shooting (being set in the future, ME was always going to be based on guns) I think that stats-based shooting doesn't work as well as skill-based shooting. That may not be in keeping with traditional RPGs, but ME doesn't need every RPG genre feature. Bioware took the bits that they felt suited the style of game they were going for. 

[Candidate 88766]

Apple_NdiB wrote...

Where's the option to say "I like how developers are moving RPGs forward by scrapping antiquated gameplay mechanics in favour of using the technology available to make the player feel more engrossed in the universe and create an experience closer to the ones the first RPGs would have had if they weren't held back by what was available at the time. And Breath."

Quoted for maximum emphasis.

Every other genre has been moving forward with the times, embracing new technology and selecting the best features from other genres. If RPGs aren't going to become stale and old then they need to do the same. Bioware is one of the few developers to notice this, and they've been doing it since Jade Empire.

Modifié par Candidate 88766, 08 août 2011 - 11:16 .

[Terror_K]

Clonedzero wrote...

also respond to my post on page 3 plz

Simply put, I still disagree. Yes, technology has improved a lot and allowed developers to expand outside the box, but games are becoming generic and samey. Again, we're getting a whole bunch of story-driven action games with light RPG elements. Great if you're a fan, and some of these games are really good, but bad for diversity and originality. It's all becoming the same brown mush, and it's a shame. The techology is there for something really special to be made these days, but it rarely is because games are becoming samey and generic, and there's a lot of streamlining and pandering to the masses, and a lot of design decisions lately that are just being copy-pasted, and not all of them good ones (regenerating health, quick-time events, minimalist HUDs, etc.).

Icinix sums up my feelings pretty well in his post at the top of this page too. The gaming industy could have the potential to produce some great stuff, but too much of it is just developers all making the same basic types of games and hoping that theirs is simply better than the next guys. And now BioWare are pretty much doing the same. Dragon Age: Origins may not have been wholly original in the grand scheme of things, but it was definitely a breath of very fresh air in the time it came out.

[Lumikki]

Terror_K wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

As a company grows bigger, it needs to look at what sells more.

You may not like it, but that's the way it is.

It doesn't need to at all. That's a fallacy. There are always choices, and BioWare isn't going to go bankrupt if it decides to stick with its roots. Newsflash: those roots are what got it where it is today.

EVERY company has to follow world progression in technology ways, they HAS no choise in matter, Unless they want to get out of business as been old fashion dinosaurs, who products no-one wants, but some few elite dinosaurs customers. THEY can NOT stick in roots, if everyone else doesn't do same.

You can not stop progression. Do you think CRT TV technology sells well in today or VHS video tape recorders?

Same is happening with RPG.

Modifié par Lumikki, 08 août 2011 - 11:24 .

[Clonedzero]

also a huge thing about ME1's loot system thats always bugged the hell out of me...is why shepard, the human alliances most elite soldier and a spectre the galactic UN's black ops specialists, equiped with subpar stuff? it makes NO SENSE in context with the story. its actually extremely immersion breaking. wouldnt he be given state of the art weapons and armor? why would some nameless mook spacepirate have a vastly superior gun to shepard? why would there be high quality perfect condition human armor in a locker in a GETH base?

[didymos1120]

Someone With Mass wrote...

By the way, ME1's inventory system and the words "incredible" and "robust" should never be in the same sentence.

Nah.  You can make it work.  Watch: It quite competently induces a robust, ever-growing dread of the incredible tedium that awaits you in every crate.   

[Terror_K]

javierabegazo wrote...

Do you seriously not realize just HOW MUCH of your 77% is based on your interpretation? Nevermind, forget I said anything, I don't see this going anywhere.

Yes.

But then, isn't the state of the RPG, BioWare and Mass Effect all based on all of our interpretations?

[Gravity Bun]

Apple_NdiB wrote...

Where's the option to say "I like how developers are moving RPGs forward by scrapping antiquated gameplay mechanics in favour of using the technology available to make the player feel more engrossed in the universe and create an experience closer to the ones the first RPGs would have had if they weren't held back by what was available at the time. And Breath."

Agreed 100%.

[Terror_K]

Lumikki wrote...

EVERY company has to follow world progression in technology ways, they HAS no choise in matter, Unless they want to get out of business as been old fashion dinosaurus, who products no-one wants, but some few elite dinosaurus customers. THEY can NOT stick in roots, if everyone else doesn't do same.

You can not stop progression. Do you think CRT TV technoly sells well in today or VHS video tabe recorders?

Same is happening with RPG.

Again, how is swapping out "archaic" RPG mechanics for "archaic" shooter ones progression or evolving in any sense? And how exactly have the likes of Call of Duty evolved at all recently?

This isn't about evolution and bettering the game at all. It's not about technology and progression. It's about pandering and following current trends that are popular. Full stop.

[javierabegazo]

Terror_K wrote...

javierabegazo wrote...

Do you seriously not realize just HOW MUCH of your 77% is based on your interpretation? Nevermind, forget I said anything, I don't see this going anywhere.

Yes.

But then, isn't the state of the RPG, BioWare and Mass Effect all based on all of our interpretations?

Lumping together in your assessment, a whopping extra 50%, who "voted" for an option that had nothing to do with opinions on "the way RPG's are evolving/dying",  isn't only a bit silly, but is a bit disingenuous to yourself.


It's like if I make a poll asking people whether or not they want to go to the store, and the options are

a) Yes
No
c) Gosh, Crowds make me nervous

and then taking all the results from b and c and deciding, hmm, yes, they must have meant the same thing.

[Lumikki]

@Terror_K

It's not better evolution in your eyes, but it's in many other eyes it is. That's different and that's why it can't be stoped.

Modifié par Lumikki, 08 août 2011 - 11:25 .

[Il Divo]

Someone With Mass wrote...

By the way, ME1's inventory system and the words "incredible" and "robust" should never be in the same sentence.

This, unless the word "not" is in between them. I had even more trouble taking the article seriously after that.

To answer the question at hand, RPGs are probably dying, not that this is a huge problem for me. The elements of Bioware games I enjoy are the interactive story, the dialogue, character, and choices. RPG elements are fun, but secondary to the previous list and in Mass Effect's case, the gameplay sucked hard.

[Dean_the_Young]

Are RPG's evolving or dying?

RPG's are evolving. In fact, they're doing so well at it that they've broken they presumption that 'role playing' is a synonym for 'item management.'

I mean, has anyone played Catherine? Don't tell me that isn't an RPG simply because you climb towers of blocks in your underwear with a pillow.

[didymos1120]

Terror_K wrote...
Yes.

Then you shouldn't be presenting it like this:

That's a whopping 77% of voters who aren't happy with the direction RPGs are taking lately. Pay attention, BioWare.

As settled fact with nary a hint that you're interpreting it to suit your bias.  It's dishonest.  Sorry, but it is.